| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ByBy Baby
   |
Posted - 2005.03.03 10:14:00 -
[31]
On paper I like it. I hope it will be good in reality also. Now projectiles CAN change damage types without changing the optimal range.
I really like that laser do more EM-damage and less thermal. Laser will rip shields apart but have problem with armor. Laser will now be semi balanced.
Hybrid, I think there would benefit more to have 4 rages and 2 ammunition types on those ranges. 1 who do better damage and 1 who take lesser cap (and make lesser damage). That way hybrids with there lower falloff can still hit within there optimal + falloff and can chose from high damage and bad cap or lesser damage and higher cap.
But overall I like it.
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 11:14:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Rod Blaine
Only problem is going to be to decide on when to switch form short to medium and medium to long.
I dont think anyone is going to change ammo in PVP unless its tanking BS that are fighting. 10 seconds of 0 damage output is far to long.
--------------------------------------------------
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 13:16:00 -
[33]
While there are some ranges where Hybrid and Projectile ammo will be lacking, I think that the changes are for the better.
On long range:
In reality, I could never see the benefit of ever using Iron ammo. Those +60% were nearly more than my lock range could handle, or I could use tracking computers in order to get a higher damage output from shorter range ammo.
On short range:
It is good to see that there will now be more than a singular choice in short range. There everything is about damage, and so you seldom really used anything but Antimatter.
On frigates:
I will miss the range of Plutonium. I had two ammo types in my 125mm generally - Plutonium and antimatter. Antimatter was my main ammo for dogfights, while I switched to Plutonium for maximum damage outside web range.
On the hybrid changes:
Over all, this change needs a lot more work for hybrid ammo. This isn't to do with range, mainly, but much more with damage.
Considering that the number one priority will always be more damage, if one ammo type is increased in damage at expense of capacitor I think many people with swallow the cap and try to kill the opponent faster instead of needing cap.
The general problem right now is two-fold:
1. Hybrid ammo does the same amount of damage, but at different cap usage.
2. Hybrid "high grade" ammo does mainly thermic damage, and single damage type is not preferable.
In effect this will yield that people will use ammo types that mixes damage types and uses minimum capacitor. The choice of ammo will be decreased to three instead of 8 under the current suggestion.
So here's a few other suggestions on how this can be balanced (noted should be that I am a great believer in damage, and a disbeliever of capacitor (to a breaking point)):
1. Make the less capacitor reducing ammo more stabil - increased tracking
2. Make the radioactive hybrid ammo do EM damage, too. (Doesn't solve the long range ammo, which is not radioactive)
3. Make some hybrid ammo do explosive damage, too.
4. Compound idea: make the more radioactive do increasingly EM and the solid cores more explosive force damage. Still the main part of the damage should be kin/th.
Even though I dislike making Hyb. ammo more like Proj ammo, of course.
Just some food for thought
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. |
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 14:33:00 -
[34]
Anybody else think the new infrared crystal numbers look dodgy ?
Radio range mod went up from 1.6 to 1.625
Microwave range mod went up from 1.4 to 1.5
Infra red range mod went down from 1.2 to 1.125
Surely that should be 1.25 instead ?
As to the changes in general, I think they look very good. All these people saying that kinetic doesn't need to be tanked now, have you forgotten all those caldari ships flying around with kinetic missile bonuses ?
The new ammo (hybrid and proj) certainly makes fighting against specific npcs easier, hybrids will now be more useful against serpentis, bloods and sanshas. I doubt it will effect PvP that much, and if it does only to make opponents slightly less predictable, though most ppl tank against all damage types anyway.
|
CCP Hammer
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 17:37:00 -
[35]
I'm thinking about trying the long range hybrid ammo with more kinetic bias. What are people's thoughts on that?
|
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 17:45:00 -
[36]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
I'm thinking about trying the long range hybrid ammo with more kinetic bias. What are people's thoughts on that?
The only real concern that I have is that antimatter and plutonium ammo will be all but unused. Rails dont really have the tracking for -50% range ammos, and blasters tend to not have the cargo room to carry reloads. Whatever someone loads out when they undock in a blasterthron is what theyre stuck with, and the increased kinetic damage, with the -10% cap use, will make the uranium ammo the only widly used -50% range ammo.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 17:52:00 -
[37]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
I'm thinking about trying the long range hybrid ammo with more kinetic bias. What are people's thoughts on that?
keep in mind that blasters will always use shortest range ammo. Rails probably use shortest range most often, then medium range ammo sometimes. I bet the long range ammo used very rarely. I really don't care what it looks like damage wise.
The main focus is always short range ammo. I don't like thermal bias on it, cause thermal damage is the most common and everyone hardens against it. Why not let people decide which damage bias they want to have - kinetic and thermal? make ammo types for both
|
Vigilant
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 17:58:00 -
[38]
I am thinking "Why another NERF   "
Really....is this just cause BIG Lasers need tweaking...so while we are at it..lets tweak them all
Not trying to be angry about it...but this whole NERF... BUFF trend... Gun of the Day...Ship of Day think gets a bit old.... Dont't ya think
|
Mule Lopeer
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 18:10:00 -
[39]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
I'm thinking about trying the long range hybrid ammo with more kinetic bias. What are people's thoughts on that?
iron should deal purely kinetic damage
|
Angelus Mox
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 18:24:00 -
[40]
The three range catagories for the ammo is a good idea, as its imposible to micromanage the small bonus/penalty while in battle. I can comment on Projectile or laser as i dont use them.
Now, hybrid ammo. I dont like the change to a bias towards Thermal damage as logicaly, a weapon which fires a slug (charge) at hyper-velocity would do kinetic damage from the impact of the slug on the shield/armour. Thermal should be secondary to kinetic. So it would be a better idea imo if you have a kinetic/thermal, balanced, thermal/kinetic style breakdown of damage. This gives the user some flexability as to the damage they cause.
Another idea which I think a few others have touched upon, is to use the new dammage tables, but give the Rail gun a kinetic damage bonus which increases with the size of the gun, and the Blasters an explosive damage bonus, to represent the plasma exploding on contact with the shield or hull af the target.
|
Seraph Demon
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 18:55:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Mule Lopeer
iron should deal purely kinetic damage
The hybrid weapons fire charged plasmas of the respective elements, so I would argue that they should all deal some combination of thermal and kinetic.
Originally by: CCP Hammer
I'm thinking about trying the long range hybrid ammo with more kinetic bias. What are people's thoughts on that?
Hammer, I support this idea, there isn't enough kinetic damage across all ammo types right now (why oh why did you make Titanium Sabots do 6Ex and 3Ki? they should do 3Ex and 6Ki!). Furthermore I think that the more balanced ammo types should be less cap friendly. Right now the most balanced of the short-range ammo types is also the cheapest to use. Damage that is distributed across several damage types is generally more effective because it forces defenders to spread their tanking out instead of allowing them to specilize.
Reverse the damage spreads on the short/long range ammos so that the most expensive are the most balanced and you'll have all my support.
On a slightly different note: I'm liking the changes for projectile ammo types (I am after-all a projectile user), this'll teach our amarr oppressors!
|
meowcat
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 19:08:00 -
[42]
cutting the amount of kinetic damage = nerfing ships with good kinetic resistances.
~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~
yeah but no but yeah but no but |
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 19:22:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Seraph Demon
Originally by: Mule Lopeer
iron should deal purely kinetic damage
The hybrid weapons fire charged plasmas of the respective elements, so I would argue that they should all deal some combination of thermal and kinetic.
....actually that's the principle of the blasters. In the rails , the principle is rather like the gauss rifle, and where the suspended atoms are the propellent/payload afaik...
quote from the hybrid ammo descriptions:
(AM case btw)
Quote:
Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of antimatter atoms suspended in plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired.
it's kinda like: rail shoots the entire ammo and blasters only shoot the payload
-------------------
Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
Lord Anubis
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 19:33:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Lord Anubis on 03/03/2005 20:23:29
Edited by: Lord Anubis on 03/03/2005 19:51:49
This change brings with it some concerns (ok havent tested it but heres my to isk)
I use 1400`s and have refined it to almost an art fourm and have gotten pretty dam good at it.
With ammo i use plasma (why not emp you ask) i find that to hit anything for consant damge i have to have an optium range of around the 40m mark.
With emp it takes me to 32 or 36 (not sure will check on it) and i find even that when emp gives me stronger hits the overall dps drops due to more misses.
Now 1400 is a long range weapon you say so i souldnt be using -50% range and i agree with you but i found out of all the ammo i used that fusion and plasma give me the best dps at my desired fighting range with 1400`s which is 30-75K any thing more and less my damge drops to almost zero or a damage so low a civi shield booster can tank.
The new ammo changes put these to ammos into the -50% catogory thus rendering them useless to me. Which reduces my 1400`s damge
from 700 (40 damge plasma x dam mod 17.5)
to the now neareast useable ammo of 630 (36 depleted x 17.5 dam mod)
this is a change of 70 Dam per gun per every 10.4 seconds
so in one minute the total dam loss i have accrued (if i worked it out right using 5 guns) is
(30x5)x(60/10.4) which gives 865 dam loss per minute divide that by 60 and ive now lost a total of 14.5 damage a second
To round as i think ive rambled on is that i belive the ammo change is good but 0 to -50 range pen is to big of a cap we need at least one -25 or +25 range ammo to bridge it
like bring one ammo up and one ammo down ie
proto s haveing 1.25 range and doing 7.5 dam
fussion s having 0.75 range and doing 11.5 dam
Edit on a side not does any one know who hammer actully makes his graphs as it would be a very cool tool to use when equiping ur ship as im only going off of changes i notice and could be wway off the mark
You cant beat Death
But you can make the bastard work hard for it
wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:13:00 -
[45]
I love the changes, though I would like to see balanced damage types.
Mostly Kenetic, mostly Thermal and balanced between the two. If this happened I would carry the 3 ammo types for whatever range and mix them in my guns.. sometimes I might use a specific type, I dunno.. either way, I think this would be an awesome change.
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
CCP Hammer
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:14:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Vigilant
I am thinking "Why another NERF "
Really....is this just cause BIG Lasers need tweaking...so while we are at it..lets tweak them all
Not trying to be angry about it...but this whole NERF... BUFF trend... Gun of the Day...Ship of Day think gets a bit old.... Dont't ya think
I'm honestly not trying to nerf or buff anything with this proposal. The idea is that the "middle" ammo is hardly used and even though there will be less choice of ranges there will be more choice of damage types. This is especially true for short ranged guns like blaster and autocannons where the highest damage ammo was really the only logical choice. Hopefully this makes for more dynamic combat where pilots are switching ammo to do better damage for different situations.
So far the general feedback has seemed mostly positive from projectile users (which this was originally designed for) but the hybrid users are not as happy about it mostly because the switch to the more racially appropriate thermal damage. Anyhow, this change isnÆt a sure thing, thatÆs why I blogged about it and put it on the test server for feedback. IÆm hoping some people will actually go on there and try it out then come back with some constructive comments.
|
Leshrac Shepherd
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:14:00 -
[47]
I like the changes on projectile ammo and laser crystals, however, I think the solution is not enough for artillery users. Right now Fusion Works very good wih Howitzers because it only takes -25% of your range, adding some points of kinetic damage to it does not compensate.
A Possible Solution would be moving the Projectile short range ammo to -37.5% instead of -50%, they already do less damage than other -50% ammo, so I don't think it would be unbalanced.
Another one, though I don't know if possible, would be to have more than 8 ammo kinds for projectiles, that would help close the gap between -50% and -0%.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Vigilant
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:20:00 -
[48]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Originally by: Vigilant
I am thinking "Why another NERF "
Really....is this just cause BIG Lasers need tweaking...so while we are at it..lets tweak them all
Not trying to be angry about it...but this whole NERF... BUFF trend... Gun of the Day...Ship of Day think gets a bit old.... Dont't ya think
I'm honestly not trying to nerf or buff anything with this proposal. The idea is that the "middle" ammo is hardly used and even though there will be less choice of ranges there will be more choice of damage types. This is especially true for short ranged guns like blaster and autocannons where the highest damage ammo was really the only logical choice. Hopefully this makes for more dynamic combat where pilots are switching ammo to do better damage for different situations.
So far the general feedback has seemed mostly positive from projectile users (which this was originally designed for) but the hybrid users are not as happy about it mostly because the switch to the more racially appropriate thermal damage. Anyhow, this change isnÆt a sure thing, thatÆs why I blogged about it and put it on the test server for feedback. IÆm hoping some people will actually go on there and try it out then come back with some constructive comments.
Thanks for the polite reply CCP Hammer... I ask..since like many, I am going for the ALL around T2 Pilot... and it would affect me and many others...
|
Lord Anubis
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:27:00 -
[49]
ok tried out the test sever ..... scrap pretty much what i said i fort for a laugh i would try using all the -50 ammos on my 5 guns vs a raven.
Erm yeah wtf pwn was thhe ravens respons i done 2 plasma 2 emp and 1 fussion all same range pen all damge types hurt alot
all i can say is nice one hammer even thou your a dev you seem to be bating for the right team
You cant beat Death
But you can make the bastard work hard for it
wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia |
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:29:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Lord Anubis
all i can say is nice one hammer even thou your a dev you seem to be batting for the right team
It has to be some kind of bannable offense to make a homosexual advance to a dev.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
Lord Anubis
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:31:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Lord Anubis on 03/03/2005 20:31:03
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Originally by: Lord Anubis
all i can say is nice one hammer even thou your a dev you seem to be batting for the right team
It has to be some kind of bannable offense to make a homosexual advance to a dev.
trust me i wasnt coming on to him lol but if i get projectiles boosted i might think about it 
You cant beat Death
But you can make the bastard work hard for it
wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia |
Xariethe T'farren
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:31:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Xariethe T''farren on 03/03/2005 20:36:24
Well, they're welcome to make the changes (I know plenty of people will like them), but I like sniping, and ammoless weapons, so I use heavy lasers with radio crystals. In my book, this means losing 2/7 of my damage in return for a microscopic range boost. 
All I can say is goodbye cap
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:32:00 -
[53]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Originally by: Lord Anubis
all i can say is nice one hammer even thou your a dev you seem to be batting for the right team
It has to be some kind of bannable offense to make a homosexual advance to a dev.
Btw Hammer, that putting a full kinetic amo in the long range ones for rails seems a good idea.
throw it on, it would be good for Caldari rails users in RP terms and good for the non-pvp crowd that use rails against npc's.
|
R31D
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:36:00 -
[54]
I'd hate to see these changes to ammo occur. I like the way it is. I enjoy changing ammo's to get that range just perfect and other sad stuff. Keep it, please.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:40:00 -
[55]
All kinetic railguns = dead minmatar HAC's.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:44:00 -
[56]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Originally by: Vigilant
I am thinking "Why another NERF "
Really....is this just cause BIG Lasers need tweaking...so while we are at it..lets tweak them all
Not trying to be angry about it...but this whole NERF... BUFF trend... Gun of the Day...Ship of Day think gets a bit old.... Dont't ya think
I'm honestly not trying to nerf or buff anything with this proposal. The idea is that the "middle" ammo is hardly used and even though there will be less choice of ranges there will be more choice of damage types. This is especially true for short ranged guns like blaster and autocannons where the highest damage ammo was really the only logical choice. Hopefully this makes for more dynamic combat where pilots are switching ammo to do better damage for different situations.
So far the general feedback has seemed mostly positive from projectile users (which this was originally designed for) but the hybrid users are not as happy about it mostly because the switch to the more racially appropriate thermal damage. Anyhow, this change isnÆt a sure thing, thatÆs why I blogged about it and put it on the test server for feedback. IÆm hoping some people will actually go on there and try it out then come back with some constructive comments.
You need to think less what makes sense storyline wise and what people will actually do. If you move me to mostly thermal and give me no choice but a much weaker kneitic ammo to switch damage types. I am just going to run into, "HAHa, its Dio that we are at war with and he is in system. Quick let me load up 3 thermal hardners so I can WTFPWN him. HAHAHAHA."
Personally, I think mabye range extending bonus should be dropped for hybrids and should look like this in favor cap bonus since hybrids are energy monstors. Not to mention this layout would stop me from being Tanked WTFPWN with no hope of survival.
Either that, do something about drones for Gallente.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:46:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Dionysus Davinci on 03/03/2005 20:46:43
Originally by: Selim
All kinetic railguns = dead minmatar HAC's.
Please, you have explosion ammo and EMP ammo. Two of the weakest resitance damage types. Do what I am often forced to do when PvP. Mount a hardner or two for your weakest damage restiance.
|
Elaine Threepwood
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:50:00 -
[58]
Just a short question: The short range projectile ammos are listed as doing a total of 12 damage in the blog (same as the hybrids and lasers) but on the test server they are only doing 11... Which one was the mistake?
|
CCP Hammer
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:56:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Lord Anubis
Edited by: Lord Anubis on 03/03/2005 20:23:29
Edited by: Lord Anubis on 03/03/2005 19:51:49
This change brings with it some concerns (ok havent tested it but heres my to isk)
I use 1400`s and have refined it to almost an art fourm and have gotten pretty dam good at it.
With ammo i use plasma (why not emp you ask) i find that to hit anything for consant damge i have to have an optium range of around the 40m mark.
With emp it takes me to 32 or 36 (not sure will check on it) and i find even that when emp gives me stronger hits the overall dps drops due to more misses.
Now 1400 is a long range weapon you say so i souldnt be using -50% range and i agree with you but i found out of all the ammo i used that fusion and plasma give me the best dps at my desired fighting range with 1400`s which is 30-75K any thing more and less my damge drops to almost zero or a damage so low a civi shield booster can tank.
The new ammo changes put these to ammos into the -50% catogory thus rendering them useless to me. Which reduces my 1400`s damge
from 700 (40 damge plasma x dam mod 17.5)
to the now neareast useable ammo of 630 (36 depleted x 17.5 dam mod)
this is a change of 70 Dam per gun per every 10.4 seconds
so in one minute the total dam loss i have accrued (if i worked it out right using 5 guns) is
(30x5)x(60/10.4) which gives 865 dam loss per minute divide that by 60 and ive now lost a total of 14.5 damage a second
To round as i think ive rambled on is that i belive the ammo change is good but 0 to -50 range pen is to big of a cap we need at least one -25 or +25 range ammo to bridge it
like bring one ammo up and one ammo down ie
proto s haveing 1.25 range and doing 7.5 dam
fussion s having 0.75 range and doing 11.5 dam
Edit on a side not does any one know who hammer actully makes his graphs as it would be a very cool tool to use when equiping ur ship as im only going off of changes i notice and could be wway off the mark
What you say is absolutely true and I tend to suggest PP and Fusion ammo to people in their 1400mm because of tracking issues. I need to ponder this one for a bit and try to come up with a solution that doesn't nerf the 1400mm but doesn't give the 800mm too much damage. I was origianlly going to give the short range projectile ammos more damage but when asked point blank by TomB if I truely thought that the projectiles needed more damage after I just boosted them I couldn't honestly and whole heartedly say that yes I felt they should. I don't like to put changes like this out unless I feel it's for the better so max damage stayed at 11.
Regarding the graphs, the tracking formula hasn't been made public so you won't be able to make them yourself unless reverse engineered the formula. If you had the formula you could make the graphs with Excel. It's been a dream of ours to add these graphs to the in game info windows but we haven't had the programmer time to do it.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.03 20:56:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Elaine Threepwood
Which one was the mistake?
The Network Administrator putting a spreadsheet app on Hammerhead's machine
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |